Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2012 tour of She Has a Name/archive3


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:Ian Rose 10:01, 8 June 2013 (UTC).

2012 tour of She Has a Name

 * Nominator(s): Neelix (talk) 19:53, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because the last FAC for this article failed solely due to lack of discussion and the article has since been promoted to good status. Neelix (talk) 19:53, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Support (having stumbled here from my FAC), as GA Reviewer. I reviewed the article and it is high quality, meticulously sourced with appropriate references, displaying a significant amount of secondary source coverage of the topic. The article has high encyclopedic value and it's quite educational as well. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Support Nikkimaria (talk) 20:46, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Comments
 * File:RCMP_officers_Beth,_Janice_%26_Harp_2.jpg: since permission says "This photo belongs to the City of St. Albert", do we have evidence (eg. OTRS) that it is allowed to be used here?
 * FN21, 22, 25, 67, 70p2, 71, 74: page?
 * FN61: publisher?
 * Suggest using "critical ratings" instead of "professional ratings"
 * "Professional ratings of the performances ranged between 3 and 5 stars out of 5": technically true, but this seems problematic given the next sentence - that reviewer didn't use stars, but definitely wasn't that positive either
 * " the play was declared to stand out" - a bit awkward
 * "The performances in Calgary and Red Deer sold out.[7] Because the early 2011 performances were sold out" - repetitive
 * Should be just "Aeolian Hall", no "The"
 * In general, there's some repetitiveness in phrasing - try reading through with an eye to eliminating that
 * Who is Brian McConaghy?
 * What sort of special effects were there?
 * "The festival organizers announced that attendance was up by 23% from the previous year" - suggest including at least one number, to contextualize percentage increase. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:47, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have replaced the image of the RCMP officers with a picture with a clearer statement of permission, added the publisher to FN61, switched "Professional ratings" to "Critical ratings", clarified the statement about the stars, reworded the statement about the play being "declared to stand out" for flow, reduced the amount of repetitiveness throughout the article, removed the "the" before "Aeolian Hall", added more information about Brian McConaghy, and added more information about the special effects. I am attempting to locate the missing page numbers through my local library. I have contacted the Calgary Fringe Festival and they have informed me that attendance in 2012 was at 9022. They also informed me that they have not published this statistic on their website or anywhere else, but would place the information on their website soon. Neelix (talk) 22:39, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have dealt with all of the footnotes you mentioned; they all now either have page numbers or urls. Neelix (talk) 03:17, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Support Comments from Jim. Generally sound, and avoids pov, but inevitably some nitpicks Jimfbleak  -  talk to me?  10:12, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The performances in Calgary and Red Deer sold out.[7] Because the early 2011 performances were sold out—repeats "sold out"
 * Carl Kennedy portrayed Jason, Evelyn Chew portrayed Number 18, Glenda Warkentin portrayed Marta, Alysa van Haastert portrayed Ali, and Sienna Howell-Holden portrayed Mama. —too many "portrays"
 * one-man Passion play —"play" should be capped too
 * London—I know it's linked on the first use, but still seems a bit Easter Eggy, I'd prefer "London, Ontario" on the first occasion to avoid confusion with the Great Wen.
 * Fu—ing Stephen Harper—is this the actual title or a bowdlerised version thereof? Seems coy even for Canada (I've stayed on Davie in Vancouver!)
 * The Gazette declared Kooman's play only second-best—to...?
 * In the references, the title of the play needs italicising.
 * Some of the references aren't really RS, such as campus newsletters and the Joy Smith site, but looking at what they are sourcing, I think they will do (no action required).
 * I have reduced the number of instances of "portrayed" to one, capitalized "Passion Play", added the provinces to the cities on the tour, spelled out the full name of Fucking Stephen Harper, named the play to which She Has a Name was declared second-best by The Gazette, and italicized the title of the play in the references. Neelix (talk) 14:45, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you've gone a little over the top giving explicit provinces for all the towns, I doubt that there are other Saskatoons or Ottawas, but that's your call. No other queries, changed to support above  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  14:58, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes way over the top with the province names, only London, Ontario needs one. Mattximus (talk) 01:59, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have removed all of the other province names. Neelix (talk) 04:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Spot checks I recommended a source check in one of the earlier reviews, but didn't do so myself as I'd already commented and was leaning support, so I was concerned about possible neutrality given I didn't have a fresh set of eyes. However, as no-one else has done so, here goes. I've selected statements and references more or less at random.
 * Ref 5: Doesn't explicitly state that the pimp is unnamed, but this is implied
 * Ref 16: Skype material Confirmed
 * Ref 17: Confirmed
 * Ref 34: Ms Tolsma refers to 'we' when discussing raising this money, but the article only credits her as being involved and she doesn't say who she was representing so the statement that there was "a group" which raised funds is not confirmed by this reference
 * Ref 52: Written before the performance, and so doesn't confirm who the panelists actually were on the day
 * Ref 38b: Ditto
 * Ref 48: Confirmed
 * Refs 63, 64a: Confirmed
 * Ref 68: The Vancouver Sun link is to a Factivia link and prompts me for a university log-in
 * Ref 72 is aslo a Factivia link and should be marked as such (it also prompts me for a university log-in). I'd suggest running through the references and marking or amending these references (note that this is also disclosing the university you have links with, which you may not wish to be doing)
 * Ref 76: confirmed, but can you say what the base figure for the 23% increase was?
 * As a couple of observations: 1) few of the references are to what I'd consider first-rate sources, and many are to what seem to be puff pieces promoting this play or pages published by community and church groups. In the context this is probably an acceptable level of referencing given that nothing better is likely to be available, but it's a bit marginal (not a reason to oppose IMO, but it raises a question mark). 2) the word 'Church' kept jumping springing up in the references (several of which were actually published by churches), including in relation to who funded and provided venues for the performances. There seems to be a religious link here which is never really fleshed out in the article - it seems that church groups with an interest in social justice were a significant audience and source of support for the tour. Nick-D (talk) 12:04, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have removed the word "unnamed" and have reworded the statements about the panelists to clarify that they were scheduled rather than that they attended. I have added "Subscription reqiured" tags to all of the references that employ Factiva links. I don't mind disclosing the fact that I am affiliated with the university mentioned. I have called the Calgary Fringe Festival again and they again agreed to place the attendance statistic on their website; hopefully, it will actually go up this time. They have told me that there were 9022 people in attendance in 2012, but there are currently no published sources for that statistic. I would agree that a significant portion of the audiences and support for the tour came from church groups interested in social justice; at least two fundraisers for the tour were held at churches, one of the performances took place at a church, and two of the panels took place at churches. I haven't found any sources that say anything more than that, however. Is there any way that you feel this point should be fleshed out in the article more? Neelix (talk) 18:49, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * You can only go as far as the sources say (and of course, I could be totally wrong in my assessment!). The coverage is OK given the available sources, but overall I think that this article's sources are a bit on the lightweight side for a FA, to be frank. A single academic article or an in-depth story by a serious journalist would be more useful in covering this topic than all the current sources combined. I'm certainly not opposing this article's promotion, and would be pleased to see it on the main page given that it's an impressive piece of work and you've made great use of what's available (and I know how hard it is to build an FA when there aren't any comprehensive sources to draw on) but I don't think that I can support it either. So I'm going to sit on the fence. Nick-D (talk) 10:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Delegate comment -- Although this nom has a healthy level of support, it's still barely two weeks old and I'd like to leave it open a little longer to give any other potential reviewers a chance to comment, especially in light of Nick's points above. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:45, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Ian Rose has requested an additional source review spot check here. The users who have already reviewed this article in other ways are Cirt, Nikkimaria, and Jimfbleak. Would either of you be willing to perform the second source review spot check? Neelix (talk) 13:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Well I think this has been open long enough and consensus is still clearly with promotion, so we'll call 'time'. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:05, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 09:12, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.